5-5 -- What is Left to Play For

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Haile SpikedLemonade
    • Jun 2024

    5-5 -- What is Left to Play For

    Patriots, Broncos and Packers are 3 guaranteed losses so for those here who want to say their fan dick is bigger than mine, bend it and shove it up your own ass.

    With no 1st round pick, losing out makes no sense.

    Whaley showed by mortgaging the future to acquire Watkins that he will do what it takes to keep his job.

    Marrone did the same by starting Orton.

    These are desperate men.

    I think we can win 3 of our last 6 games to end up at 8-8.

    That will be enough for Whaley, Marrone and Hackett to keep their jobs.

    After all, the Bills have not been .500 for over 10 years.

    8-8 is an improvement.

    Talking Proud!
  • feldspar
    Registered User
    • Mar 2007
    • 13620

    #2
    Re: 5-5 -- What is Left to Play For

    Originally posted by SpikedLemonade View Post
    Patriots, Broncos and Packers are 3 guaranteed losses so for those here who want to say their fan dick is bigger than mine, bend it and shove it up your own ass.

    With no 1st round pick, losing out makes no sense.

    Whaley showed by mortgaging the future to acquire Watkins that he will do what it takes to keep his job.

    Marrone did the same by starting Orton.

    These are desperate men.

    I think we can win 3 of our last 6 games to end up at 8-8.

    That will be enough for Whaley, Marrone and Hackett to keep their jobs.

    After all, the Bills have not been .500 for over 10 years.

    8-8 is an improvement.

    Talking Proud!
    First of all, if you think that losing to the Broncos, Patriots, and Packers is a foregone conclusion, what's the point of making the playoffs in your mind, anyway?

    Secondly, I don't figure that I'll "bend over and shove it up my own ass."

    Losing out wouldn't make any sense, either, even with a high first-round pick. There is no Andrew Luck in this draft. If there was, Oakland would probably get him, even though they probably have the best rookie QB in THIS year's draft already.

    I don't think that the Bills "mortgaged their future" on the Watkins trade. They just don't have next year's first round pick. The Bills have had ELEVEN first-round draft picks in the last nine years, and they're still where they are. People that want to insinuate that the Bills future would be very bright if only they had a first-round draft pick next year have there head up where the sun doesn't shine. Is there a particular QB in next year's draft that you think that is a franchise QB...that is the main thing the Bills are lacking right now.

    Starting Orton was STILL the right thing to do. If they still have hope for Manuel, they should probably start him again after their next loss. One thing I won't be able to tolerate very well is if the Manuel situation plays out too long. I don't know what the realistic answer is, but QB is the key. The Bills have talent on this team.

    But there is a thing to be said about continuity. Everybody that screams to fire everybody after every loss are nimrods. Nobody is going to be fired until at least the end of the season. We'll see what happens in the meantime, and that will play in. The knee-jerk reactors would have given Kyle Orton a big contract a couple of weeks ago, and were on-board with resigning Fitz. And yeah, dump Dareus in the preseason...great idea.

    It's times like this when you find out who is who, not when things are going well.
    Last edited by feldspar; 11-13-2014, 10:53 PM.

    Comment

    Working...
    X